ASA vs FNV vs WPM vs RGLD

For growth investors, ASA Gold and Precious Metals Limited (ASA) is the stronger pick with 947.

2% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 44. 6% for Royal Gold, Inc. (RGLD). ASA Gold and Precious Metals Limited (ASA) offers the better valuation at 11. 4x trailing P/E (1715. 1x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Wheaton Precious Metals Corp. (WPM) a "Buy" — based on 20 analyst ratings — the highest consensus in this comparison. The "better buy" depends entirely on your goals: growth investors should weight revenue trajectory, value investors should weight P/E and PEG, and income investors should weight dividend yield and streak.

On trailing P/E, ASA Gold and Precious Metals Limited (ASA) is the cheapest at 11.

4x versus Wheaton Precious Metals Corp. at 42. 2x. On forward P/E, Royal Gold, Inc. is actually cheaper at 20. 3x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Franco-Nevada Corporation wins at 0. 99x versus ASA Gold and Precious Metals Limited's 340. 56x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.

Over the past 5 years, Wheaton Precious Metals Corp.

(WPM) delivered a total return of +225. 3%, compared to +61. 2% for Franco-Nevada Corporation (FNV). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: WPM returned +689. 7% versus FNV's +262. 2%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.

By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Franco-Nevada Corporation (FNV) is the lower-risk stock at 0.

66β versus ASA Gold and Precious Metals Limited's 0. 99β — meaning ASA is approximately 50% more volatile than FNV relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Wheaton Precious Metals Corp. (WPM) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 0% versus 13% for Royal Gold, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), ASA Gold and Precious Metals Limited (ASA) is pulling ahead at 947.

2% versus 44. 6% for Royal Gold, Inc. (RGLD). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: ASA Gold and Precious Metals Limited grew EPS 1112% year-over-year, compared to 32. 5% for Royal Gold, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, WPM leads at 30. 3% annualised revenue growth. Higher growth typically commands a higher valuation multiple — check whether the premium P/E or P/S is justified by the growth rate using the PEG ratio.

ASA Gold and Precious Metals Limited (ASA) is the more profitable company, earning 96.

9% net margin versus 45. 2% for Royal Gold, Inc. — meaning it keeps 96. 9% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: ASA leads at 96. 9% versus 64. 5% for RGLD. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — ASA leads at 100. 0%, reflecting greater pricing power or product mix advantage. Stronger margins indicate durable pricing power, lower cost of revenue, or higher mix of software/services. They are one of the clearest signs of business quality.

The PEG ratio (forward P/E divided by expected earnings growth rate) is the most precise measure of undervaluation relative to growth potential.

By this metric, Franco-Nevada Corporation (FNV) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 99x versus ASA Gold and Precious Metals Limited's 340. 56x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Royal Gold, Inc. (RGLD) trades at 20. 3x forward P/E versus 1715. 1x for ASA Gold and Precious Metals Limited — 1694. 8x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for RGLD: 31. 8% to $315. 00.

In this comparison, RGLD (0.

7% yield), FNV (0. 6% yield), WPM (0. 5% yield) pay a dividend. ASA does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.

For long-horizon retirement investors, Franco-Nevada Corporation (FNV) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.

66), 0. 6% yield, +262. 2% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (FNV: +262. 2%, ASA: +465. 3%), confirming both are viable long-term holds — but the lower-volatility option typically results in less emotional selling during corrections. Retirement portfolios generally favour predictability over maximum returns. Consult a financial advisor before making allocation decisions.

These companies operate in different sectors (ASA (Financial Services) and FNV (Basic Materials) and WPM (Basic Materials) and RGLD (Basic Materials)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.

FNV, RGLD pay a dividend while ASA, WPM do not, making them suitable for different income and tax situations. These fundamental differences mean investors should not choose between them on a single metric — the "better stock" depends entirely on which of these characteristics aligns with your investment strategy.